Hi,
Yes and now. To begin with, there is a tendency if there is a bad news, shoot the messenger.
On the other hand, those who has followed Lloyd's testing for many years know his methods and foibles.
The A7r vibrations was an example of that. Many users could not observe it, as the effect was subtle - essentially reducing the sharpness of the A7r to A7 levels. The issue was essentially almost non observable, as the images still looked sharp, but very easily measurable. So, now that weakness of the A7r is widely known, but when news about it came out they were widely sneered at by some "experts".
Now, Lloyd has a foible for large apertures. For testing it is a good thing, for large aperture work shows the weaknesses of a system. I presume that we don't buy 6000$ lenses just to shoot them at diffraction limited f/11? Personally, I shoot mostly f/8, which is also limited by diffraction on most of my lenses. Using f/8 instead of full aperture covers up a lot of subtle focusing errors.
Now, I think Lloyd gets things wrong some times. A good example of this is that he makes a bit to much noise about Sony raw compression. He observed some artefacts and attributes it to the raw compression. In this case I would guess he may be in error. But, the Sony raw compression can create artefacts. *) So, it is good Lloyd makes some noise about it, but some of that noise may be misinterpretation of his observations.
Best regards
Erik
*) Sony has actually two intertwined methods of raw compression. One is a tone curve, that is basically sound, the other one is a "delta compression" that can cause artefacts where local contrast is very high.
No offense but to me it sounds more like the subscribers to his site are offended...